Oh just great. What do people think was in their ionization smoke detectors for the last 25 years? Americium 241. Less than 1 microcurie to be sure, but it was there as a source.

It's more disturbing to read about the lack of vigilance of the NRC and the "smilarity to plutonium" which implies a veiled threat. If you use pesticides or weed killers you also use heavy metal poisons of the same type. Note that Americium is not a naturally occurring isotope, except by bomb testing.

Also I'll say only a terror weapon, as only a small detectable amount of ANY alpha or beta emitter would cause mass panic by the untrained. As in "OMG IT'S RADIOACTIVE."

So don't freak out just yet. So what exactly are we being told? Be afraid?
Sorry, ABC, rather than spread fear you might try education once you get your GED.

Its time to put the security lid on the
AEC and NRC. And also on any national or international companies that mine or
process products or by products. The roulet wheel is rigged against United States Security.

Here we are worried about a terrorist again and our news media is going to make sure on national television if there is any terrorist out there that isnt sure how to make a dirty bomb, by golly we will tell them. Why don't you go over and make them for them! What the hell is wrong with us that we do these things??

Chris, I promise you that our news agencies aren't telling true terrorists anything that they don't already know. I worry more about the home-grown nut jobs...

Chris, do you know how most corporations learn of security weaknesses? They hire hackers to see if they can break in the system. Isn't it better for us to think of the weakness rather than them? Don't be silly Chris. If Main Stream Media is just now reporting this, the terrorists already dreamed it up a while back. How naive are you?

and I would not worry too much about terrorists right now. This administration rolls out the fear factor whenever it suits their agenda.

Chris,

I agree with you, but the simple answer to your closing question is that in bureaucracies it's how you get ahead. Your entire motivation in that environment is to make your competitor look bad. Your pay grade goes up, so why worry about any collateral effects like life or death?

In my opinion, our present administration is just like "the boy who cried wolf." They have used the terror scare one too many times. Think of all the other bogus scares in recent times: weapons of mass destruction, Y2K, etc.. Try again George.

Hmmm ... certain quantities eh?
Those same terrorists might be buying 'certain quantities' of gasoline and propane, with much less trouble.

Roger, the "administration" is responding to the pressure of media hype, who call The Committee to Bridge the Gap a "watchdog group," when they are pure and simple an anti-nuclear activist organization.

And anyone with "money" can buy enough common home smoke detectors to do EXACTLY the same thing. Quick! Destroy the smoke detectors in your house before a terrorist turns it into a bomb!

Will ABC ever let these things go? Is Brian Ross the king of all the yellow press?

Sad, truly sad.

Thank you for another useless, uninformative article with no substance intended to stir up things for attention. This sting accomplished nothing but making an already difficult job much harder. I notice that your particular article failed to mention that after they obtained that license, they (illegally) forged it to change the quantity they were allowed to have.

... any one of US who can still think that either party is bettewr than the other .... God help US

The fact that they can illegally forge a document and get the radioactive materials just goes to show how little the Bushites have done to secure the "homeland"

You can't really stop someone from illegally forging a document after it is issued, which was what the GAO people did in this case. It doesn't matter which party is in office. The people involved here committed a crime, and unless you're standing there watching over their shoulder while they do the forgery, the only thing you can do is catch them after the fact.

This is the way bureaucracy works, people, whether it is for a driver's license, FAA license, firearms permit, a nuclear materials license, whatever. The bureaucracy accepts the sworn word of the applicant, which is given when the applicant signs the document attesting to it's accuracy. Sure, you can do some things prior to issuing the permit, such as background checks, information verification and the like, but those are only as thorough and accurate as the database you access to do your checks. In this case, unless they put an agent in the field to physically check on the location of the reported "business", all they could do was verify that, yes, a business by such-and-such a name had been registered in the state. After that, all you can do is post-licensing follow up and inspection. We really can't afford the overhead associated with having a federal bureaucrat looking over the shoulder of every applicant for a federal license while they are in the process of preparing the application.